Please open this document and read the Bass Coast Shire Council’s Press Release in regards to the published draft version of the EES requirements.
Press Release Bass Coast Shire Council - Desalination EES Scope

Kenneth Davidson
February 28, 2008

I also quoted correspondence between Croker and his partners from Tasmanian Water Minister David Llewellyn, who expressed interest in the project and said his Government had a policy covering the export of surplus water in return for a payment of royalties by the end user. The response from the Victorian Government has been silence except for announcing that the desal plant would go ahead (after saying it wouldn’t during the last state election). The Government has refused to look at the alternatives even though, on paper, the water produced would cost about a sixth of the desalinated water, and the electricity consumed would belch additional greenhouse gases into the environment equal to putting another 240,000 cars on Melbourne’s roads.

With the restricted scope for the EES draft version (The Draft Scoping Requirements advise that investigation and comparison of strategic alternatives on economic and environmental grounds is not required) in mind please continue reading Mr. Davidsons article in The Age: Brumby sticks his head in the sand on water

Please take your time to read this article that Chris Heislers wrote for FOE about why desalination is not the answer to our water management problems.

download - Desalination/Climate Change article for Friends of the Earth

24/2/2008

Victoria’s proposed DESALINATION plant;
an energy guzzling, climate changing, ecosystem altering water factory.

Author; Chris Heislers (www.yourwateryoursay.org) Contact; 0419 556381

In reference to rainfall, 2006 was a horrible year; our worst recorded year, yielding only 165 Gl as inflow to Melbourneʼs catchments compared with the previous 10 yearsʼ average of 453 Gl. In an apparent panic response to the terrible year for rainfall that was 2006 (though there have been other bad years; 1997, 1982 and 1967 all yielding little more than 200 Gl each (1)), exacerbated by the fact that Victoriaʼs state government had done far too little in the preceding years despite warnings of reducing rainfall, government performed an inexplicable backflip in policy; ignoring much of its own applauded 2004 white paper “Securing Our Water Future Together” (2), and placing an internationally and unanimously declared last resort as the primary option to securing Melbourneʼs water future; desalination, the most expensive, environmentally damaging, greenhouse-gas producing option of them all (11).

To the detriment of us all, the decision opposes two of the key statements in Governmentʼs White Paper:
“The Victorian Government is aiming to achieve the sustainable management of water.”
“We canʼt create more water – we need to use it more wisely.”

Recent warnings of a worst-case global warming scenario must prompt a rethink of this regressive and ill advised decision. Government has an opportunity to establish a truly sustainable approach to water use within Melbourne. Unlike other areas in the world and despite our reducing rainfall, Victoria does not have a problem with current or near future water supply. However, we do have a problem of misuse of the water that is available to us. With conservation measures, water reuse at the point of use and prudent recycling from our major waste water treatment plants we can secure our water future by water that is supplied by natural systems.

The proposed water factory will produce 150 Gl water per year, upgradable to 200 Gl. Melbourne currently uses approximately 380 Gl per year. At present, 450 Gl of urban storm water and 150 Gl of treated waste water runs into Melbourneʼs bays and Bass Strait. Independent expert water authorities confirm that at least half of the storm water, and most of the treated water can be easily collected and reused, at less economic and environmental cost than the proposed water factory.
Why spend a fortune on a climate / environment threatening new factory to suck the water back, when we have the opportunity to stop it running out in the first place?

Continue reading Desalination/Climate Change article for Friends of the Earth »

YWYS Press Release 21 Feb 2008 Requirements for EES Scope as pdf

21 February 2008

Government’s Desalination Scoping Requirements ignore
Garnaut’s global warming concerns.

The Brumby Government confirmed its disregard for fair process and refusal to engage in any meaningful consultation. The Draft Scoping Requirements for Victoria’s Desalination Project demonstrate arrogant indifference to the environment and the reality of climate change.

The very day that Ross Garnaut reiterates the urgency of reducing greenhouse gases, the state government releases scoping guidelines that exclude the examination of more energy efficient methods of providing water for Melbourne.

Opponents had hoped that the Environmental Effects Statement (EES) would finally assess the appropriateness of this project for Victoria but the government has cunningly limited the EES to managing the impact rather than assessing the suitability. The Draft Scoping Requirements advise that investigation and comparison of strategic alternatives on economic and environmental grounds is not required.

The evaluation objectives outlined in the government’s document concentrate on ‘avoiding or minimizing to the extent practicable’ all environmental and economic effects. This is hardly reassuring and confirms the government’s determination to build a desalination plant on one of Victoria’s most spectacular beaches regardless of the findings.

These guidelines would have you believe that: the conversion of a rural coastal landscape to an industrial site can be managed; greenhouse gases can be mitigated; whales and dolphins and other migratory species won’t be impacted on and ‘one or more pre-treatment and/or desalination pilot plants’ of 6 ML per day that will kill over 100 000 organisms every minute need not be examined by the EES (the pilot plants are excluded).

The limited time-line and lack of independence confirms that the government is using this document purely as a vehicle to identify the performance criteria that the PPP provider must achieve in implementing this project. The key question is whether we should build a desalination factory on a piece of pristine piece of Victorian coastline. The EES should not be based on the government’s position that the factory is a fait accompli and that only cosmetic changes will be considered.

1 EES is to be completed by December 2008 and the DSE is the proponent of the project and responsible for preparing the EES and ensuring its quality

For more information contact:

Andrea Bolch
President
Contact: 0400 065 253

John Wright
Coordinator Planning Committee
Contact: 5678 7083

Chris Heislers
Steering Committee
Contact: 0419 556 381

The Department of Planning and Community Development’s Draft Scoping Requirements for the Desalination Project’s Environment Effects Statement:

“Scoping requirements determine what the proponent should address in the EES, so this is an important part of the overall environmental assessment process,” Mr Madden said.

“I encourage anyone with an interest in the desalination plant project to review the draft scoping requirements and have a say.”

“The community now has opportunity to have a say on the EES draft scoping requirements I have released today,” he said.

Follow the link to the Department of Planning and Community Development:
Draft scoping requirements for the matters to be addressed in the Environment Effects Statement (EES) for the Desalination Project

PUBLIC COMMENT INVITED ON DESALINATION PROJECT EES SCOPING REQUIREMENTS

Click here to download Justin Madden’s Media release:
Media Release Minister for Planning - EES scope draft